This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

I am adopted and I would never, EVER inflict that on a child. It is not right to force a child to grow up not knowing who s/he is or where s/he came from.

So you would have preferred to have been aborted?

That must be a deeply troubling feeling and one where you might seriously think about counseling. There is no way in the world why you should not enjoy the blessing of life and all the good you can do with it. Not knowing who your parents were is not all that unusual and most in your position have been able to live full and happy lives despite this. It would seem you need to talk with someone about this.

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Originally Posted by Lursa

I have twin sisters who are adopted (at birth). They knew their mother before that crack whore died of AIDS. THey know their brother and sisters and maintain a relationship with them. They are infinitely better off with my family than her...they were born when she was in jail and ALL of her children have physical and mental issues from her being on drugs.

They were all fortunate to be adopted, since all had issues. But there are many families that want children that cannot have them....do we need MORE unwanted kids? My sisters' mother was SO irresponsible she couldnt even bother to get abortions.

Believe me...pregnancy and not giving a ****...continuing to smoke,drink, do drugs....THAT is irresponsible. Not abortion.

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Originally Posted by Lursa

I have twin sisters who are adopted (at birth). They knew their mother before that crack whore died of AIDS. THey know their brother and sisters and maintain a relationship with them. They are infinitely better off with my family than her...they were born when she was in jail and ALL of her children have physical and mental issues from her being on drugs.

They were all fortunate to be adopted, since all had issues. But there are many families that want children that cannot have them....do we need MORE unwanted kids? My sisters' mother was SO irresponsible she couldnt even bother to get abortions.

Believe me...pregnancy and not giving a ****...continuing to smoke,drink, do drugs....THAT is irresponsible. Not abortion.

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

That 'human beating heart' may stop thru miscarriage anyway...you have no way of knowing if it would come to term.

Irresponsibility is having a child that other people need to pay their own $$ to help you support. Abortion is a very responsible choice. It can enable a woman to continue an education, develop a job into a career, better care for children she already has....all things that are responsible and allow her to contribute more to society.

It is one of a few responsible choices and a woman has the right to choose what's right for her. Not for something that might not ever even be born.

Originally Posted by Bucky

I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.

Originally Posted by applejuicefool

A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Originally Posted by Lursa

That 'human beating heart' may stop thru miscarriage anyway...you have no way of knowing if it would come to term.

Irresponsibility is having a child that other people need to pay their own $$ to help you support. Abortion is a very responsible choice. It can enable a woman to continue an education, develop a job into a career, better care for children she already has....all things that are responsible and allow her to contribute more to society.

It is one of a few responsible choices and a woman has the right to choose what's right for her. Not for something that might not ever even be born.

See, there the conflict is again.

Should it have the chance? Or should the women have the chance? Which is more important?

Really, i suppose, it depends on the women in question. But....how far do you carry that? Til birth? Til some semi-arbitrary stage of fetus development? And what criteria do you place on allowing abortions after that? Whim? Mother's life? Nothing?

I've said it before (in other threads) - this issue will only be resolved when an option or options exist which give both the developing child and the mother equal freedom and chance at life.

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Originally Posted by The Mark

See, there the conflict is again.

Should it have the chance? Or should the women have the chance? Which is more important?

Really, i suppose, it depends on the women in question. But....how far do you carry that? Til birth? Til some semi-arbitrary stage of fetus development? And what criteria do you place on allowing abortions after that? Whim? Mother's life? Nothing?

I've said it before (in other threads) - this issue will only be resolved when an option or options exist which give both the developing child and the mother equal freedom and chance at life.

I'm missing the conflict.

Is it a difficult choice? I'm sure it is...but it's made by the individual in her own best interests...SHE, who is already part of society and surviving, is already the best bet for contributing to that society. Only she knows what is best for her. I mean, if her life is in danger from cancer and she chooses to not have chemo to save her fetus...that is her right too, correct? Or if she and her husband already have 3 kids and cant make ends meet....difficult choice but still right for them. I mean...she may lose her job if she has to take time off for a pregnancy. Or if an infant means she will not be able to finish college and her entire future is impacted....never reaching her potential to contribute to society?

Strangers and the govt do not know what is best here. Only that woman does.

Originally Posted by Bucky

I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.

Originally Posted by applejuicefool

A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

Originally Posted by Lursa

I'm missing the conflict.

Is it a difficult choice? I'm sure it is...but it's made by the individual in her own best interests...SHE, who is already part of society and surviving, is already the best bet for contributing to that society. Only she knows what is best for her. I mean, if her life is in danger from cancer and she chooses to not have chemo to save her fetus...that is her right too, correct? Or if she and her husband already have 3 kids and cant make ends meet....difficult choice but still right for them. I mean...she may lose her job if she has to take time off for a pregnancy. Or if an infant means she will not be able to finish college and her entire future is impacted....never reaching her potential to contribute to society?

Strangers and the govt do not know what is best here. Only that woman does.

The conflict I see is between the unborn child's rights and the mother's rights.

We give the mother precedent because she came first, among other reasons...But does that really make eliminating the child right? Not in my mind.

For me, at least....this issue will never be resolved until and unless both parties have equal opportunity to live

Re: Fed judge: Texas abortion limits unconstitutional

But not all immoral things are against the law. For example, many types of lying and cheating. It is up to individuals to act or not act, it's called free will and even God granted us that.

Infringing on a woman's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is also against the law unless she is convicted of a crime. Getting pregnant is not a crime. You have no right to tell her what to do with her body. To do so you have to infringe on her right to privacy to do so.

And you still cannot explain why our society recognizes allowing termination of a fetus to save a mother's life or to protect her from mental anguish in cases of rape or incest...but that would NEVER be the case with an individual that was already born.

What is the difference there?

pergury, fraud, this is lying and cheating and is against the law. You have a god given right to do whatever the hell you want or are capable of, the consequences are what concern us.

Your right getting pregnant is not a crime. I don't have a right to tell her what to do with her body but I do have a right to say that life which resides in her body is just as valuable worth protecting and defending as her life. If you kill in secret you've still killed.

As I said allowing the termination for protecting the mother's life is acceptable, it is self defense, I never said I agreed to the cause of rape or incest. Society deludes itself to lesser and greater degrees with its rationalization of unacceptable behavior.

The difference is the hypocrisy of relativism which pervades our society. You go to a clinic snip snip suck suck, you're an empowered woman, I kick you in the tummy, I'm a murder. That's the difference.